Long-term outcome of children with cortical visual impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cortical visual impairment (CVI) is now the most common cause of visual impairment in children. Little is known about the long-term visual outcome. This study evaluates the outcome of children with congenital CVI. Using medical records, 423 children (225 males, 198 females) were identified with congenital CVI. Of these children, 259 had follow-up visual acuity assessments. The children's gestational age varied with 32 weeks or less representing 15.9%; 33 to 36 weeks representing 10.7%; 37 to 42 weeks representing 61.2%; and 43 weeks or greater representing 0.9% (11.3% of patients' gestational age was unrecorded). Clinical data were extracted and information regarding outcome was gathered. The majority of children showed improvement in their visual acuity levels after 2 or more years of follow-up. For the 194 children initially assessed before 3 years of age, 97 had improved, 75 were unchanged, 18 had deteriorated, and 4 had sub-optimal assessments. For the 74 children initially assessed at 3 or more years of age, 23 had improved, 44 remained unchanged, 3 had deteriorated, and 4 had sub-optimal testing. Children with better visual acuity levels at follow-up were more likely to have favourable cognitive outcomes (non-mental retardation) in 12.2% versus 2.8% (p<0.01). Similarly, favourable motor outcomes (independent ambulation) were present in 20.1% for those with better visual acuities versus 7.9% for those with poorer visual acuities (p<0.01). Our study demonstrates that the majority of children with CVI underwent improvement in visual acuity. Additional disabilities were common, but those children with better visual acuity outcomes faired better. Given the frequency of comorbid conditions, appropriate diagnostic assessment services are needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".